Left Navigation Lower

You are here

Tag: "preemption"

Editorials and opinion pieces in favor of local telecommunications authority have been popping up more frequently in recent months. The benefits of increased competition due to the presence of municipal networks has become hard to ignore. Recently, we noticed a commentary published on CNBC from Seth Bailey, chief strategist at iTOK. Bailey supports the February FCC decision that peeled back restrictions in Tennessee and North Carolina.

Bailey describes the role of munis:

In a fight against this Internet injustice, more than 450 communities have created publicly-owned high-speed fiber-optic networks. Known as municipal broadband, these providers offer Internet services to their areas which are roughly 50 to 100 times faster than the offered cable or DSL connections. In short, municipal broadband allows those in rural areas to have high-speed access similar to that offered to residents of urban areas. Which means the quality of their technological lives do not suffer due to their addresses.

iTOK, a company that focuses on technology support, consumer service, and small business tech assistance, wants to see more restrictions struck down:

To that end, we call on the FCC and state legislators to challenge these laws on a more frequent basis and accelerate the competition among Internet providers. The reality is that if the U.S. wants to stay on the cutting edge of technology and continue to lead global markets in the technological revolution, we cannot allow large corporate ISPs to put restrictions on the type and quality of Internet connection speeds. The government should enact legislation immediately to require ISPs to provide the highest possible speeds to the largest group of people and let whoever can provide the best service win. If that's a large ISP or a municipal ISP it shouldn't matter. Fast, stable and affordable internet is something that everyone should have access to regardless of where they live.

Senator Janice Bowling and Representative Kevin Brooks have decided to table their legislative efforts to remove state restrictions in Tennessee. While backing for SB 1134 and HB 1303 was growing beyond the walls of the state Capitol, the sponsors decided to shore up stronger legislative support rather than risk derailing the bill entirely.

"We have had a lot of good progress, and we don't want to throw it all away," Brooks said. The votes were not there in the Senate, and he and co-sponsor state Sen. Janice Bowling, R-Tullahoma, have asked to roll the bill to the beginning of the 2016 calendar, giving them more time to garner support from their colleagues.

Energized by the recent FCC decision nullifying state laws restricting Chattanooga from expanding, Bowling, Brooks, and other local leaders thought the time was right to once again try to eliminate state barriers. The FCC decision has already been formerly challenged by Tennessee's Attorney General with the support of the Governor. Rather than depend on federal intervention to establish an environment that will encourage connectivity, SB 1134 and/or its companion HB 1303 would have solved the problem on the home front.

Economic development has been stifled by state barriers preventing municipal network expansions in the state but many constituents are plagued by lack of personal access. Incumbents who have spent millions lobbying to keep these restrictions in place...

Grand Junction community leaders have expressed a desire to work with providers to improve poor connectivity but have feared repercussions from state laws put in place a decade ago. They now plan to explore partnerships as well as municipal initiatives reports KKCO 11 News.

“It’s an indication that people really want to see us have better fiber in this city so we'll step back as a city council and see what are next steps to go forward,” says Mayor Phyllis Norris.

The approval of Measure 2A reverses the effects of Senate Bill 152 that have been in effect for more than 10 years.

City and county leaders now have the power to negotiate with internet companies and explore options of how to share their broadband with citizens.

Rather than wait for the domino effect to make its way across the state, requiring millions to be spent on local elections, Colorado should simply repeal SB 152 and restore local authority to every community. Right now, the only beneficiaries of this barrier to local choice are the incumbent providers, who at the very least are able to delay needed investments in Internet infrastructure.

Ideally, working from home allows one to choose the environment where he or she can be most productive. In the case of Seth that was Kitsap County in Washington State. Unfortunately, incompetence on the part of Comcast, CenturyLink, and official broadband maps led Seth down a road of frustration that will ultimately require him to sell his house in order to work from home.

Seth, a software developer, provides a detailed timeline of his experience on his blog. In his intro:

Late last year we bought a house in Kitsap County, Washington — the first house I’ve ever owned, actually. I work remotely full time as a software developer, so my core concern was having good, solid, fast broadband available. In Kitsap County, that’s pretty much limited to Comcast, so finding a place with Comcast already installed was number one on our priority list.

We found just such a place. It met all of our criteria, and more. It had a lovely secluded view of trees, a nice kitchen, and a great home office with a separate entrance. After we called (twice!) to verify that Comcast was available, we made an offer.

The Consumerist correctly describes the next three months as "Kafkaesque." Comcast Technicians appear with no notice, do not appear for scheduled appointments, and file mysteriously misplaced "tickets" and "requests." When technicians did appear as scheduled, they are always surprised by what they saw: no connection to the house, no Comcast box on the dwelling, a home too far away from Comcast infrastructure to be hooked up. Every technician sent to work on the problem appeared with no notes or no prior knowledge of the situation.

It was the typical endless hamster wheel with cruel emotional torture thrown in for sport. At times customer service representatives Seth managed...

After we heard that Lafayette's LUS Fiber was considering expanding to some nearby communities, we knew we had to set up an interview with Terry Huval, Director of the Lafayette Utilities System in Louisiana.

In our interview this week, Terry and I discuss Lafayette's success, the legacy of the law creating special barriers that only apply to cities building fiber networks, and the challenges of expanding LUS Fiber beyond the boundaries of the city.

We also discuss some plans they are developing to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the referendum on July 16, 2005, in which a strong majority of voters authorized the building of what was then the largest municipal FTTH network in the nation.

The State of Tennessee has filed the first appeal to the recent FCC Opinion and Order [PDF] reducing state barriers to municipal broadband. Governor Bill Haslam appears determined to keep his constituents in the Internet slow lane.

The State of Tennessee, as a sovereign and a party to the proceeding below, is aggrieved and seeks relief on the grounds that the Order: (1) is contrary to the United States Constitution; (2) is in excess of the Commission’s authority; (3) is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act; and (4) is otherwise contrary to law.

Haslam expressed his intention to explore the possibility of filing the appeal earlier this month reported the Times Free Press. In February, the Governor and Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery signed a letter from a number of state officials to the FCC urging them not to change state law. U.S. Rep from Tennessee Marsha Blackburn and her Senate counterpart Thom Tillis introduced legislation to fight the Order just days after the FCC decision.

State Senator Janice Bowling, a long time advocate for local choice, and Rep. Kevin Brooks have taken the opposite perspective, introducing state legislation to remove restrictions to achieve the same result as the FCC Order with no federal intervention. Their bill has been publicly supported by the state Farm Bureau and local municipalities such as the City of Bristol.

Hopefully, at the next election Tennessee voters will remember how their state elected officials and their Governor stand on improving connectivity in the Volunteer State. The good...

We went over the key issues in the ruling, including why the FCC had authority to take action, how the state laws limited investment in advanced Internet networks, the impact of the ruling, and what comes next.

At its March 3rd City Council meeting, elected leaders in Bristol voted 4 - 1 to adopt resolution 15 - 8 reported TriCities.com. The resolution officially supports state legislation removing state barriers that prevent municipal electric utilities from offering Internet service beyond their electric service footprint. State Senator Janice Bowling and Representative Kevin Brooks are sponsoring SB 1134 and its companion HB 1303 [PDF].

Bristol Tennessee Essential Services (BTES) is one of the state's gigabit FTTH networks but like Chattanooga, is limited by state geographic restrictions. The recent FCC decision to overturn Tennessee and North Carolina state barriers has removed that legal provision but Bowling and Brooks want to make sure it happens and that Tennessee is able to embrace smarter policy without FCC intervention.

Bristol recognizes that its gigabit network provides a rare advantage in Tennessee. From the City Council agenda on the issue:

The service is an essential element of economic development, enhances educational opportunities, increases regional and global competitiveness, and provides a better quality of life. While we enjoy the benefits of being a “Gigabit Community”, there are many areas of Tennessee that lack access to high-speed broadband service. The ability to extend this service beyond the municipal electric service territory will provide an opportunity for customers to choose their provider and ensure a high quality of broadband service at a competitive price.

￼￼At the meeting, members of the Council noted that eliminating the restriction would allow BTES the ability to bring service to areas left behind by traditional providers. TriCites.com reported:

“This is David-versus-Goliath situation in that little, tiny BTES versus companies like Charter and AT&T have had the opportunity for years to develop places like Mountain City, Kingsport and Johnson City,” said Councilwoman Michelle Dolan. “Removing these...

The Orlando Sentinel published this op-ed about local government action for broadband networks on March 11, 2015.

Local governments should make broadband choices By Christopher Mitchell

Community broadband must be a local choice, a guest columnist writes.

When Comcast announced plans last year to invest hundreds of millions in theme parks in Florida and California, its customers may have wondered why the cable giant wasn't using those funds to deliver a faster or more reliable Internet connection. While Comcast's Universal Studios faces competition from Walt Disney World, most people don't have a real choice in high-speed Internet access.

The Federal Communications Commission has just boosted the broadband definition from 4 megabits per second to 25 mbps. At that speed, some 75 percent of Americans have no choice in providers — they are stuck with one or none.

The rest of America is living in the future, often because their local government rolled up its sleeves and got involved. In some of these communities, the local government built its own network and others worked with a trusted partner. Chattanooga's city-owned electric utility built the nation's first citywide gigabit network, which is about 100 times faster than the average connection today.

Google is famously working with some bigger cities, whereas local provider GWI in Maine has partnered with several local governments to expand gigabit access.

However, the big cable and telephone companies have almost always refused to work with local governments. Instead, they've lobbied states to restrict the right of local governments to build or partner in this essential infrastructure.

In Florida, the law puts restrictions on local governments that do not apply to the private sector, such as a strict profitability timetable that can be unrealistic for large capital investments regardless of being privately or publicly owned. Some 20 states have such barriers that limit competition by effectively taking the decision away from communities.

In January, President Obama spoke out in favor of local governments being able to make these investments and partnerships without state interference. He was in Cedar Falls, Iowa, which has one of the oldest municipal broadband...

The Missouri Senate Jobs, Economic Development and Local Government Committee voted to pass anti-local choice SB 266 on March 18th. This bill, sponsored by Senator Kurt Schaefer, will increase barriers for municipal networks and damage the possibility of highly-effective partnerships with the private sector. Call your Missouri State Senator and let them know you consider this bill anti-competitive, hostile to local interests, and that you will remember their vote at the next election.

The bill was discussed in the same committee earlier this month when a number of private tech firms, industry associations, and utilities groups wrote to members to express their concern with the bill. A dozen entities, including Google, NATOA, and APPA wrote that the provisions in the bill would prevent public private partnerships that improve connectivity at the local level. [See a PDF of the letter here.]

At the time, the committee chose not to vote. Rather than listen to experts, however, they postponed the decision and voted to pass the bill on Wednesday. The only amendment was a provision excluding Kansas City, Springfield, and St. Louis.

The exceptions will help Google and SpringNet but other communities will be shackled. The legislation states that its goal is to encourage innovation but the result is just the opposite by discouraging investment through intimidation.

Columbia is watching the course of this legislation with particular interest. As we reported last fall, the city is considering expanding use of its current fiber resources to spur economic development. This bill could derail their plans and keep Columbia's population limping along with CenturyLink's dismal DSL. Mid-Missouri Public Radio reported on the bill in February:

“Smaller communities are concerned because they don’t have access to high...

Feeds

Random Quote

This is where the profit motive fails society -- there's no real financial incentive to provide coverage for someplace like Gilboa, New York, so therefore it isn't covered. But there is an incentive to prevent anyone else -- including the small town itself or, heaven forbid, the entire county -- from providing services to Gilboa because a David may grow up with the potential of killing Goliath.

Government does have an interest in seeing Gilboa, New York get access to broadband Internet coverage, because that would mean more employment opportunities, better educational facilities, and even more self-employment. In other words, like roads, sewage and utilities, broadband infrastructure is necessary to economic development.